The deadening of free speech in Australia continues

There are two discussions of the threat to free speech here in Australia by two old friends of this country. Both look at the treatment of Alan Jones and the way in which he had been sanctioned by the Australian Communications and Media Authority for comments he made about climate change. Both find it bizarre that ACMA has now become a fact checker on climate science. Weird world!

The first is from James Delingpole. He begins by going through the story of Andrew Bolt and then the Finkelstein Report and then adds that as dead as freedom of speech was becoming in Australia, “Freedom of speech is even deader in Australia” than it had been before.

Now to this list of shame we can add a third item of gob-smacking imbecility: the consignment of Australia’s most popular broadcaster, Alan Jones, to a political re-education class for having got a factual detail wrong on one of his radio shows.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority yesterday released a damning report on Jones’ show, finding he breached broadcast rules by falsely claiming Australians contributed just ’1 per cent of .001 per cent of carbon dioxide in the air’.

‘The percentage of man-made carbon dioxide Australia produces is 1 per cent of .001 per cent of carbon dioxide in the air,’ Jones told his listeners on March 15 last year. ‘Nature produces nearly all the carbon dioxide in the air.’

2GB told the media regulator Jones had done his own research for the claims, but neither he nor the station could provide any evidence.

University of Melbourne climate change scientist David Karoly said Australians were in fact responsible for .45 per cent of total carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. ‘Obviously, we would much rather prefer that the comments of people like Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt were, in fact, correct, so it is pleasing to get this ruling from ACMA,’ Dr Karoly said.

The second commentary is from Mark Steyn:

Down Under, something called the ‘Australian Communications and Media Authority’ (that’s to say, the usual bunch of statist hacks) has just ordered Alan Jones, the country’s Number One morning man, to undergo ‘factual accuracy training’ (that’s to say, re-education camp) for saying the following:

’The percentage of man-made carbon dioxide Australia produces is 1 per cent of .001 per cent of carbon dioxide in the air,’ Jones told his listeners on March 15 last year. ‘Nature produces nearly all the carbon dioxide in the air.’

Apparently, according to a global warm-monger of dubious provenance himself, the correct figure is 0.45 per cent. So the percentage of non-Australian carbon dioxide in the air is 99.55 per cent rather than 99.99999 per cent. For this outrageous crime, Alan Jones must report for ‘factual accuracy training’.

They’re laughing at us, and so they should. But it’s not really a laughing matter. Steyn concludes:

The death of free speech doesn’t seem immediately relevant to people worried about jobs and mortgages, but it is: When it’s a crime to be skeptical of ‘climate change’ alarmism, it’s harder to object to the diversion of tax dollars from you and yours to Solyndra and other ‘green’ boondoggles. Killing freedom of expression renders honest discussion of everything from the economy to foreign policy all but impossible – which suits both the left and Islam just fine.

If Australia keeps this nonsense up, I may have to come back for another nationwide tour. If they let me in.

Why when I see such stories of organisations such as ACMA do I think of the Salem Witch Trials, an analogy that for many of these smug, self-satisfied witch hunting ignoramuses would seem completely far fetched? But they and their supporters are the enemies of not just free speech but of freedom itself, not us but them.

I note David Karoly, University of Melbourne, climate change scientist, denied his/Gergis paper was withdrawn, even though it has definately been withdrawn, due to ERRORS.
Is this the same David Karoly who accused Alan Jones of errors that will require him to undergo factual accuracy training?. If so why shouldn’t Karoly, also an IPCC author, require similar re-training for his much more significant error.
I am neither a scientist nor mathematician, but I query Karoly’s reported assertion that “Australians were in fact responsible for 0.45% of total carbon dioxide in the atmosphere”.
using simple arithmetric.
CO2 in atmosphere – 3,000 Gt wikipedia
CO2 Oz 2010, – 0.45 Gt DCC
% Oz CO2, 2010 – 0.015% my estimate
% Oz CO2 – 0.45% Karoly
Help anybody, maybe Karoly means emissions for 30 years.

Abbott should promise to legislate to force members of the Australian Communications and Media Authority to be educated about other twentieth century fascists and free speech. Failure to attend workshops on the subject should result in fines and/or imprisonment.

In the Melbourne Sun-Herald on weekend a columnist called Susie O’Brien argues strongly for a ‘factual basis’ to expressed opinion. Make a case based on facts, she says, and then you are entitled to your opinion. Fine, I say. But facts are slippery things, Ms. O’Brien, especially when some facts are better than other facts, because she also says – “But I’d argue that there are some topics where there is only one valid standpoint”. She nominates climate change as one of these, and puts ‘global warming deniers’ (note the slur in that noun) into a basket of dismissed opinions held by truthers and other lunatics, who should be legally stopped from holding those opinions.

Get your facts right, Ms. O’Brien. The science on any form of climatic change is definitely not settled. You are just another form of truther yourself, one who is trying, from your position of influence, to twist facts and argue for repressive laws that suit your own prejudices.

This desire to smother opinion with other opinion is terrifying. Smother a dissenting opinion with argument, not laws. You argue for argument backed by facts, and then slip in the whammy – except for … and then we get a bundled basket into which any ‘undesired’ opinion can be slipped. Ms. O’Brien’s paving on that road to hell is dangerous indeed.

Steady on, Steyn. There was no ‘crime’, just a breach of a code of practice endorsed by the industry itself. And it wasn’t scepticism that caused the breach, but a factual error. A tiny one I couldn’t give a toss about, but an error nonetheless. If Jones wants to be considered a journalist (ha!), then he has to play by the same rules as other journalists, namely telling the truth.

As Jones says, he repeatedly quoted the correct figure on many occasions. He spoke the wrong figure just once. In radio presenter terms that would be the equivalent of a typo for a print journalist.
Will ACMA now preside over every typo and mispelling in the print media ? Thought not.

Krestinsky: Yesterday, under the influence of a momentary keen feeling of false shame, evoked by the atmosphere of the dock and the painful impression created by the public reading of the indictment, which was aggravated by my poor health, I could not bring myself to tell the truth, I could not bring myself to say that I was guilty. And instead of saying, “Yes, I am guilty,” I almost mechanically answered, “No, I am not guilty.”

Vyshinsky: Mechanically?

Krestinsky: In the face of world public opinion, I had not the strength to admit the truth that I had been conducting a Trotskyite struggle all along. I request the Court to register my statement that I fully and completely admit that I am guilty of all the gravest charges brought against me personally, and that I admit my complete responsibility for the treason and treachery I have committed.

There is the bulk atmospheric CO2 which is apparently increasing by about 1.5ppm PA or about 4Gt; then there is the annual flux which is the movements into and out of the atmosphere which are described here.

Currently the atmospheric bulk is about 3000Gt; the annual flux is 218.2Gt [from Figure 7.3, AR4].

The amount of human sourced CO2, ACO2, in that annual flux is 8Gt, or about 3.67% of the FLUX.

How much of that flux actually stays in the air and adds to the atmospheric bulk; the answer is given by the US Department of Energy [DOE]; see Table 3 on page 22 of the PDF.

From this we can see that 98.5% of ALL annual emissions of CO2/ACO2 are reabsorbed and about 1.5% of the flux or about 4Gt is added to the atmospheric bulk.

Jarrah, really, anyone who says that the left media, faifax and our abc are subject to the same level of scrutiny and vitriol, government sourced or otherwise is a fuckwit; if that is what you are advocating then you are a fuckwit.

Consider this; we had Finkelstein based on the UK hacking by Murdoch with no suggestion that Murdoch Australia has hacked anyone; yet fairfax has hacked and is never mentioned in dispatches by this censorious government.

Wayne Crews, vice president for policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, combed through the 81,405 pages of the Federal Registry — which contains the nation’s regulations on businesses, and state and local governments — and cites a report showing that regulation cost the economy a whopping $1.75 trillion in 2008.

A law that allows the government to drag journalists over the coals for factual errors is a bad law. The simple fact is you will find some sort of error somewhere in most articles, and thus be able to suppress most journalists most of the time. Or better yet, tie up those you don’t like.

The silencing is working rapidly to overcome Gillard Labor’s inadequate handling of almost any policy one can name. Gillard’s use of her “sexist and misogynist” accusations is to prevent anyone from criticising the sweet woman who runs the Country (into the ground).

“anyone who says that the left media, faifax and our abc are subject to the same level of scrutiny and vitriol, government sourced or otherwise is a fuckwit”

No-one said anything about vitriol. Gab mentioned scrutiny, and since the ABC has its code of practice policed by ACMA same as every other broadcaster, it’s self-evident that the same standards of scrutiny apply. If anything, due to the ABC’s stricter code and its taxpayer-funded status, you could argue it comes under greater scrutiny.

“point one: the ALPBC is subject to the ABC Code of Practice; not to the Commercial Radio Codes of Practice”

See above.

“point three, you idiot, is that the media should be free, not that both sides should be equally repressed”

That’s a topic worthy of discussion, but is tangential to my correction of people’s errors that was the original purpose of my comment.

Oh I know what it is CL, you’re devastated at the exposure of the complete moral failure of the Catholic Church by the Victorian Police. At least one in 20 Catholic priests in Victoria is a child molester, could be one in 12. It must be tough for you to have to face up to reality like that. Poor Lad.

Oh I know what it is CL, you’re devastated at the exposure of the complete moral failure of the Catholic Church by the Victorian Police. At least one in 20 Catholic priests in Victoria is a child molester, could be one in 12. It must be tough for you to have to face up to reality like that. Poor Lad.

That you’re completely wrong. The rules were not enforced unequally, because the breaches were not the same. Jones got his facts wrong and didn’t have an adequate system for preventing that. The ABC (specifically Media Watch) didn’t make an effort to allow someone to make a response to an allegation.

2GB conducted a review of its compliance processes following ACMA investigations which found breaches of the Commercial Radio Codes of Practice. The breaches occurred during segments of programs presented by Alan Jones broadcast on 15 March 2011 [2597, 2614 & 2636 - PDF 565 kb] (accuracy) and on 8 and 11 February 2010 [2540 - DOC 1.1 mb] (accuracy and presentation of significant viewpoints).

The review found that 2GB had some fact-checking and verification procedures in place. However, it also highlighted shortcomings in programs hosted by Alan Jones, namely:

Additional confirmation of accuracy and attribution may be required where the production team (and Alan Jones) source factual material from third parties or other non-media sources.
The editorial pieces, the subject of the ACMA investigations, did not involve the wider production team.
There are occasions when a controversial issue of public importance will be the subject of editorial and opinion comment on programs hosted by Alan Jones without any presentation of other significant viewpoints on any other 2GB current affairs program.

To address these issues, 2GB has proposed a series of measures which the ACMA has accepted. A summary of those measures is set out below.

Incidentally, Walter Stark opines, “Karoly’s figure may be derived by assuming that the purported rise of CO2 from the 280 ppm preindustrial level to current levels is due to anthropogenic emissions. This then puts the anthropogenic contribution at about 30% of current levels and Australia’s 1.5% share of global anthropogenic emissions then becomes responsible for about 0.45 % of total atmospheric CO2.

However, Australia represents about 4% of the global land area and assuming the natural uptake of CO2 is average we become a net sink.

How about that? Following a decision of the (“Don’t call us ACMA”) Australian Communications and Media Authority, Macquarie Radio Network will subject 2GB broadcaster Alan Jones to a new regime. You see, Mr Jones and his team will be required to fact-check material and to make a reasonable attempt to present alternative viewpoints.

How frightfully interesting that the taxpayer funded ABC is not required to abide by such standards.

As MWD readers will be aware, Kim Dalton (the ABC’s Director of Television) refuses to correct the documentary All The Way, which claims that the Menzies Government resorted to conscription in May 1966 in order that the Australian Army could take control of Phuc Tuy province in South Vietnam. In fact, conscription was introduced in late 1964 and Robert Menzies was not even prime minister in May 1966. See MWD Issues 157, 138, 135, 134 and 133.

Moreover, senior ABC executive Bruce Belsham remains unfazed that an article by Professor Robert Manne of La Trobe University (“Proudly One of Australia’s Top 500 Big Polluters”) on the ABC’s The Drum contains three factual errors in just one sentence. See MWD Issues 157, 129 and 128.

2GB employs not one left-of-centre presenter and it will be required to present alternative viewpoints. No such requirement will apply to the ABC – which employs no conservative presenters.

On ABC Radio’s 702’s Mornings with Linda Mottram today, ABC Media Watch host Jonathan Holmes conversed about Alan Jones’ factual errors and the need to prevent or correct same. He neglected to remind ABC listeners that his program holds the world record for delaying a correction. It took Media Watch a full two decades to correct an error it made in 1991 concerning Angela Pearman. See MWD issues 113 and 100.

- there was no crime
- the changes ordered were not because of AGW scepticism
- the ABC gets equal treatment under the law, but effectively is under far greater scrutiny
- different breaches get different treatment.

“The ALPBC has occasionally been flogged with a limp lettuce leaf”

For some reason, you’re persisting in your blatant error. It’s as stupid as claiming the guy who lost his license for speeding is being treated ‘unequally’ to the guy who got jail time for assault.

“You’re point scoring, not addressing the real issue”

No, I was pointing out that you’re trying to change the subject of my comment. I hadn’t made any reference to free speech, something everyone here knows I defend vigorously, because I just wanted to clear up Steyn’s false statements so that we could have a discussion based on reality. Instead a succession of people had to be tapped gently with the clue bat when they insisted on being flat-out wrong.

“engaging with you is a waste of my time”

Then stop. Come back when you have an argument based on facts, and you’ll find it won’t be such a waste.

jarrah, I’ve read the ACMA decision which is based on its opinion that Jones’s statement about the % of CO2 produced by Australia was his opinion and not, as implied when he made it, as a scientific fact.

Jones’s ‘opinion’ was that Australia produced 1/100,000th of the CO2 in the atmosphere. Jones also failed to produce any research to susbstantiate this ‘opinion’ presented as a ‘scientific fact’.

That is Jones’s error; not that his estimation of the amount of CO2 contributed by Australia to the atmospheric bulk total was wrong but that he presented it as a fact.

Now, I gave you the facts about Jones’s ‘opinion’ above; based on them I made this conclusion:

1.5% of all CO2, both natural and ACO2 is retained annually to add to the atmospheric bulk.

Of that 1.5% addition, annually, the ACO2 component is 3.67%; so ALL of nations’ contributions is 3.67/100 x 1.5/100 = 0.000552.

Australia’s annual emissions are 1.28% of the global ACO2; so 0.000552 x 1.28/100 = fuckall and far less than what Karoly said and probably less than what Jones said.

Jones should have done his research; but he is closer to the truth than Karoly.

Lizzie, do you realise that the ABC is under constant scrutiny? Try googling “ABC bias”.

Do I realise?? What a patronising joke you are Jarrah.

Friends and I have gone one better in the past and have tried to make complaint about (among other things) the ABC’s promulgation of complete numeric falsehoods when reporting how many in Sydney turned their lights off in response to Earth Hour. ABC beat up. Complaints: feck off. Political descriptors (implicit opinion) given as factual statement. Plenty. Complain. Feck off.

So you can do just that yourself, Jarrah, and Munty too, on this issue anyway.

… to say nothing of the usual stacking of lefties as invitees on Q and A, and Alberscreechi and others doing disgracefully biased interviews: left (soft and warm) and right (hard and crazy), all masquerading as analytic reportage.

Karoly is comparing Australian anthropogenic emissions to world anthropogenic emissions.

He ignores non-anthropogenic CO2 emissions on the bogus assumption that all CO2 additions since the industrial revolution have been anthropogenic. This is Skeptical Science quackery. Cohenite exposes it.

Karoly lies from authority, and ACMA accepts it. Karoly has form in this regard.

Leigh Sales being oh so friendly and nice to Greg Combet, on ABC 7.30. Both on the same page concerning the word of choice – carbon ‘pricing’ and everything to do with it. No bias there, natch. Fact, natch. It’s a price not a tax, complete fact there, Jarrah. Except it is really a tax, tax, tax, tax, tax, tax, tax…. that’s my fact.

Da Hairy Ape grunts mildly: that was like being savaged by a dead sheep, wasn’t it?

I hadn’t made any reference to free speech, something everyone here knows I defend vigorously

You really don’t, actually. Occasionally would be more like it. Half-heartedly, perhaps. Unobtrusively? In an open-minded, non-dogmatic dialogue that respects the values and aspirations of the jackbooted?

Now some of them might be saying that this guy got the facts wrong and therefore he should correct it. Fair enough, corrections are issued by every media outlet, but a government mandated training session in accuracy on a contentious issue sounds more than a little spooky to me. It sounds like communist reeducation camps.

Is this a new Australia where the “Government” knows what is good for you, and forces its people to not listen to those with a different opinion.